Could I have any success claiming to be African-American?

Great Debates
81

I have to say I think it would get rejected out of hand. If it were so easy to game the system if would have collapsed by now. Do you really believe in your heart of hearts that people would ignore this enormous loophole? Free money? In America?

You provided the example of the college application. Students are identified by gender by the registrars office. A male who claimed to be a woman would not be allowed to stay in a women’s dorm, nor be assigned to a men’s dorm until he identified as male. At that point, he would lose his minority money.

82

Look, I’m not saying that people do try to pass for things they actually aren’t. I’m just saying that in theory, people can pass for plenty of things, not just African American. In theory, a man could check female and get considerations he might not have had otherwise, but most men aren’t going to go through the hassle of living a lie. So most men don’t do it. Likewise, white-looking people could call themselves black or Latino, but the vast majority will not unless they are truly black or Latino.

83

What exactly kind of “free money” do you think is available to African Americans? :confused:

I mean- there are Small Business Loans- but they are *loans, * and they are available to everyone. Sometimes, being a Minority helps, but they don;t get them “free”. There are a few odd Scholarships that are available just to certain dudes- but just about everyone is a member of some group that has a scholarship aimed at it. And- those are scholarships which have to be earned through excelent academic perfomance.

84

A little late in the thread here, but my affirmative action knowledge comes mainly from higher education. If I’m recalling my law classes with any specificity, I believe the “compensation for past ills and discrimination” argument for affirmative action was pretty much eradicated in the Bakke case in the 1970s… and the Gratz and Grutter cases a few years ago ended any conversation on that level. The justification for affirmative action, in higher education at least, is the “compelling educational value” that a diverse student body presents. Even then, such programs must be narrowly tailored and used in conjunction with other efforts.

Speaking as someone who went to school on an affirmative action scholarship - and who wouldn’t have been able to afford to go to college and live on campus if not for the scholarship - there were always a few people who looked White at programs I attended. These programs, BTW, were open to any student who wanted to attend. While students of color got the invitations in the mail, if you were a White kid hanging out in the library, smelled food and wanted to get some (after the speeches, recognition of the committee, step show, etc.) you certainly could. One of my buddies was half Latino, half White, and looked like someone out of 90210. I wouldn’t say he advertised the fact that he was half Latino, but several people knew and he stayed active in the program for several years.

To answer the OP, in the case of my scholarship, I was interviewed by an admissions officer, who asked me a lot of questions about my education, my parents (including where they were from)… it was a long process. My hypothesis is that if you are phenotypically similar to the group you are claiming to be a member of, much of the questioning is blunted… just enough to fill out the forms correctly. If you don’t, I’d expect to hear questions about one’s lineage, etc., come up quite a bit. And I would think that such a person (legitimately) would be prepared for such questioning, or even bring it up. (My aforementioned friend talked about his frustration in being presumed White, and said he made a point of letting people know his heritage fairly early in relationships.) If you were to apply to a program or for a scholarship, you’d have to be fairly adamant, if not downright surly, to avoid answering questions about your parents’ ethnic background, their level of education, and so forth. Or you could lie, I suppose.

Then there’s the experience of being part of a minority program - convocations, meetings, that sort of thing. Again, if one was pretty bold and had no problem lying to people about your heritage - because in the cocktail party conversations, I’m certain someone would ask, “What’s your ethnic background?” if it wasn’t evident or assumed - you might make it through for a while, but that would probably raise the antennae of the administrators in charge of the program, and they’d investigate.

If it’s the sort of thing that is done without meeting someone face-to-face, I guess you might get away with it. But unless you were applying to such a program for the purpose of exposing the hypocrisy of affirmative action, I think that would be ethical suicide. At some point it would become known (perhaps through your resume, professional networks, etc.) that you pretended to be African American to gain some advantage in a grant or contract competition. I’d think you’d be looked at with a great deal of scorn if you chose to do something like this.

I have a friend who administers a program for students of color at a prestigious technical university - it’s a summer program to give kids a chance to take some classes, get acclimated to the campus, and make connections with their peers and profs. At one point he had federal money supporting this program so he had to ensure that all of the kids were students of color. However, every now and then a White student would apply to the program. He would send the student a personal note, explaining that the program was expressly for students of color, but invite the student to the “open” events (BBQs and receptions) if he/she was interested. Occasionally a student would respond back, making the case for why he or she thought the program would be a good fit for him or her. In this case, if the student qualified in all other aspects, he would ask the institution to sponsor the student and allow him or her to participate in the program. (It was something of a catch-22, because a lot of students looked down on the program, despite the fact that these students often ended up doing quite well, graduating with honors, and the like.) My friend would say, “If a White student is willing to do the work, and undergo the same scrutiny every student of color in the program goes through as a participant, he’s welcome to join.”

I haven’t talked to him since the SCOTUS ruled on Gratz and Grutter so I’m not sure how his approach has changed, if at all.

85

I don’t know why you (and John Mace) keep insisting that, absent a real-life example, this theoretical issue is irrelevant. Am I talking about what the “vast majority” would do? I’m asking about what would, and what should, happen to me if I were make even so absurdly tenuous a claim as I have to be considered an African-American.

And my so-called"insistence that the government has no established definition" is not my insistence at all. It was my question: What IS the government’s definition? to which no poster before you had supplied anything resembling a concrete answer, and which several posters had indicated clearly that, with no definition given, they were fine with that. Thanks for the hard and fast definition.

I still think I might qualify, if I wanted to. Everyone descends from the “black racial groups of Africa,” don’t we? Biblical Hebrews aside, and descendents of Lucy aside, hasn’t genetic study shown that no one is nearly as pure “racially” as they might suppose? If I have a single black ancestor (and I don’t think I do, but that’s just my unsupportable guess) and I want, for whatever reason, to self-identify as African-American, on what basis would you disqualify me? If a more legitimate applicant, with say one black great-grandparent, were to apply, would turn him down, too? If so, on what basis?

Please understand, I’m not asking these questions belligerently, but from a belief that quantifiable entities should not be dealt with in an arbitrary, common-sense kind of way, since that way leads to abuse. The fact that I happen to be unfamiliar with specific examples of particular abuses shouldn’t render my theoretical inquiry invalid, though it may pain you acknowledge that for some strange reason of your own.

As to an example of abuse, I think that the definition you cite clearly qualifies a recent Nigerian immigrant to the U.S. as an “African-American.” I’m not sure how I feel about such funds going to people who got here a century and a half after slavery was abolished, but I’m sure African-Americans would hold a variety of views, and it’s helpful to have the definition to be able to discuss those views.

86

Hippy Hollow, thanks for your interesting practical contributions to this thread.

87

When I got my driver’s license renewal form I put, into the block for race, a ‘C’ for caucasian. It came back with a ‘C.’ Later changed to ‘N’ and now a ‘B.’

Whenever questioned about it I quote a state law that says anyone 1/8 ‘C’ is considered completely ‘C.’

88

See my post #12, and others. Like I said- I sat on the damn EEOAC, and there was NO definition of any race (other than Native American). None. Zero. Zip. Nada. You self-identified. * Read you with the face’s census cite “The concept of race as used by the Census Bureau reflects *self-identification * by people according to the *race or races with which they most closely identify. * These categories are sociopolitical constructs and should not be interpreted as being scientific or anthropological in nature. Furthermore, the race categories include both racial and national-origin groups.”

**No established definition. ** You self-identify. How many times do I have to say this?

*Now, if you were trying to show discrimination as you were AA, the Investigator *could * ask (if you did not appear to be Black)- “How did they know you were African American?”

Here is the OMB cite, which is what the Census Bur is using:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/fedreg/1997standards.html

"2. Respect for individual dignity should guide the processes and methods for collecting data on race and ethnicity; ideally, respondent *self-identification * should be facilitated to the greatest extent possible, recognizing that in some data collection systems observer identification is more practical. …
underscore that *self-identification * is the preferred means of obtaining information about an individual’s race and ethnicity, except in instances where observer identification is more practical (e.g., completing a death certificate);

do not identify or designate certain population groups as “minority groups”;

continue the policy that the categories are not to be used for determining the eligibility of population groups for participation in any Federal programs;

*do not establish criteria or qualifications (such as blood quantum levels) that are to be used in determining a particular individual’s racial or ethnic classification; and *
do not tell an individual who he or she is, or specify how an individual should classify himself or herself. "…
"(13) OMB accepts the following recommendations concerning the term or terms to be used for the name of the Black category:

The name of the Black category should be changed to “Black or African American.”

The category definition should remain unchanged.

Additional terms, such as Haitian or Negro, can be used if desired…

– Black or African American. A person having origins in any of the black racial groups of Africa. Terms such as “Haitian” or “Negro” can be used in addition to “Black or African American.” "
(italics mine)
In other words, unless they are looking at your dead body; you get to self-identify. Mainly 'cause dead dudes can’t talk much, or even check a box. :stuck_out_tongue:

So, if you want to “self-identify” as “Black or African American” that’s your business. I assume you have a moral code and personal ethics- use them.

89

I can’t take “self-identifying” (or a moral or ethical response to a legal question) very seriously as a means of reaching a definition. I can ‘self-identify’ as a Martian or a cantaloupe if I’m sufficiently crazy or contrary or amoral, but (to paraphrase Lincoln) calling myself one doesn’t make me one, unless “one” is anything I say it is.

90

Too bad. Since it seems to be working without any apparent problems, I don’t think anyone can take your concern very seriously. I’m not a fan of most AA programs, but you’re making a mountain out of a mole hill. We’d probably run into more problems than we have now if we tried to make a strict legal definition.

91

Unfortunately I know of no objective method to devise the ethnicity or race of an individual. Someone with my background might identify as Scottish-American or a Welsh-American but I only identify myself as American. Which designation would be correct? The interpretation of race and ethnicity isn’t cut and dry.

Check out a book called “Hitler’s Jewish Soldiers” by Bryan Mark Rigg about soldiers of Jewish descent serving in the German military, even the S.S., pre-war and during the war. Soldiers were defined as Jews based on ancestry alone even though the soldiers expelled from the military didn’t identify as Jewish nor did the Jewish community at large consider them to be Jews. It’s a little more complicated then that with people being classified as Jew, half Jew (mischlinge), and quarther Jew but no need to get into that right now.

Marc

PS: Hopefully this does Godwinize the thread. I’m not comparing anyone here to a NAZI but since this is about racial/ethnic classification I thought it was relevant.

92

I’m not making anything out of anything.

I asked a question about the definition of a term, and I learned, to my astonishment and to your apparent blissful satisfaction, that there is no real effort to have the term in question actually defined, and that it means whatever you or I would like it to mean.

I can’t foresee buildings crumbling as a result, but I do suspect that some of my “imaginary” test cases actually exist, that some person with 1/16th A-A ancestry has already self-identified as Black and has gotten funding for something or other that he or she would not be entitled to otherwise, and that some other person with a greater percentage of A-A ancestors would find that questionable if he or she only knew about it, and I hope you can find it in your heart to forgive me for continuing to inquire.

93

I concur. In fact, almost word for word. :cool:

94

Seems pretty silly to call a black African-ancestered person from another country an “African American.” I know a few Jamaicans and Trinidadians, at least, that would take offense.

And now, I apologise for the highjack, but oh well.

I have an idea that could be a money maker. Stick with me here…

In some Native American tribes in places like Oklahoma, you can be 1/16th Cherokee and still belong to the tribe But in most New Mexico tribes you must be at least half to be on the tribal roles and get tribal benefits.

In a few of the pueblo tribes in NM, there are people from other tribes who have lived in the pueblo for a number of generations, since back when the Spanish came in and mixed things up. At the Sandia pueblo, for example, there are some Hopi families who have been there for a long time, even have a ceremonial kiva there and have interjected some of their traditions into the local culture. The Sandias never made a big deal about this until they built a casino at Sandia and started to make a whole lot of money that was going to be, in part, divided amonst the members of the tribe. At that point, they decided that the amount of actual Sandia Indian blood you had was more important than how long your family had been there. The money that individual tribe members are bringing in from Casino money is not insignificant.

So here’s my idea: Find a full-blooded Sandia guy who is willing to sell his sperm. The offspring, no matter what the mother is, will be 50% Sandia Indian and so should qualify for tribal benefits, including profits from the Casino. There are only a few hundred Sandia tribal members now, so I’m wondering what would happen if all of a sudden there were hundreds more; offspring that didn’t even necessarily know a thing about the language, customs, history of these people but could genetically claim tribal membership?

Somebody oughta at least write a fictional account of this scenario.

95

“We’d probably run into more problems than we have now if we tried to make a strict legal definition.”

Well, we’d have different problems, that’s for sure. The legality of defining “African-American” (or “Latino” or “woman,” for that matter) as loosely as we seem to have done (I still trouble believing this is the legal standard) presents a tremendous problem in principle. Do we let people collect Social Security if they self-identify as being over 65? Do we let people collect disability checks if they self-identify as disabled? Do we allow Arnold Schwartzenegger to run for President because he self-identifies as a native-born American? Of course we don’t. Of course these are absurd examples. Of course there are clearer lines of demarkation in these idiotic examples than in the case of someone who self-identifies as African-American. But we do have in place a working definition that is clearer than the way we’ve defined various minorities (or in the case of women, majorities), and I can’t believe that some Nigerians or some 1/16th blood African Americans haven’t partaken of benefits that IMO they were intended by the law to partake of.

Speaking of brilliant bases for fiction, JillGat, I think there’s also a neat idea in writing a work about some unemployed Ph. D. in Chaucer studies who, on the verge of quitting the profession because he can’t find a job, decides to apply as an African-American, and thereupon easily gets the job from a university such as mine eager to ask no questions of any qualified candidate self-identifying as A-A. When I was on the tight job market a decade or two ago, I would have done almost anything to get a teaching position–I don’t know that I would have had the guts or effrontery to try this scheme, but I do know that I shouldn’t have been able to think it could have worked. From this conversation, I conclude that maybe it would have been worth a shot.

96

It sounds a sensible idea

Also you could write the novel under the pseudonym of Morris Zapp

Taking the mick out of a stupid system gets it into disrepute.

97

No- because there is a solid cash incentive to cheat.

No- because there is a solid cash incentive to cheat.

No, because there is a huge power, wealth and fame advantage to cheat.

*What * benefits? Where do you get the idea that checking the box “African-American” on a form and suddenly your mailbox is crammed with checks? :dubious: :rolleyes: I asked this question before and you ignored it- what “benefits” are there to claiming “African American”? (hint, ask a Black person, or a Black Poster here if they feel there are scads of cool benefits for being Black. Monstro, like to enlighten this dude?)

You can self identify as there is no particular benefit to cheat. Sure there are scholarships for Blacks- but there are likely scholarships for one-legged Anabaptist children of Coal miners too. Yes, there are Small Business loans- but everyone can apply for those and you are expected to pay them back- they are loans.

There is no significant real benefit for claiming you are African-American. Yes, I suppose someone unscupulous, by claiming to be whatever sex, minority etc is wanted at a given time can- with a great deal of effort- gain a small benefit by “gaming the system”.

98

What’s your major malfunction? There is no significant real benefit to gaming the system AND there is a small benefit to gaming the system AND you’re pissed at me for bringing the subject up.

As I’ve explained somewhat tediously, I work in a field where after 10 years of graduate training, a highly qualified person sometimes cannot find a job, and often cannot find a job that doesn’t require him or her to pull up roots and live in East Bumfuck Kentucky teaching five classes per semester of remedial English for the rest of his or her natural life.

Except if he or she is African-American. Then colleges literally bid against each other for the honor of hiring you, often in rather cushy circumstances (reduced teaching load, very decent salary, usually nice environment), which package I would say is a major benefit, perhaps the most major benefit one could want from a job: a secure, well-paying, permanent position doing what you like and what you have trained for. The only thing you have to do is “self-identify” as African-American. To you, checking that box is “a great deal of effort” that gains one only “a small benefit.” Each to his own, I suppose.

After ten years of training, and dozens if not hundreds of job interviews at numerous MLA conventions, I was at the point of packing it in and becoming a civil servant, or a computer technican, or a lawyer, none of which prospects pleased me and none of which I was really suited for, when I got offered a tenure-track job. If I hadn’t gotten an offer that year (or maybe I could have stuck it out for another round of interviews, I don’t know), I would have had to kiss my training and my best talents goodbye and do something I was neither trained nor pleased to be doing for a living.

I believe I would have self-identified as a cantaloupe if I thought I’d have gotten away with it. I would have shaved my head, so no one could see my blond hair, kept my blue eyes shut tight behind dark glasses, and claimed (in my best cantaloupe accent) that I was descended from a long line of vinous fruits, if I felt there was a chance I might be believed.

99

I doubt this. Cite? (Although you do live in “the mossy forest” where perhaps things aren’t like in Reality.)

The physical effort in checking the box is little. The effort of having to live a lie would weigh my conscience greatly. Perhaps not so with yours.

Please prove the benefit- IRL.

100

Doubt it all you like. Universities all across the country are desperate for qualified minority candidates. Just this year, I’ve been told that my department is much whiter than the university would like (of our 22 full-time professors, only one is African-American) and we should look very seriously at minority candidates, particularly those who are African-American. The problem is, we get very few applications from African-American candidates with Ph.Ds in the appropriate field, and all of them get multiple job offers. In the last few years, we’ve had ALL our Black candidates withdraw before the hiring process was finished because they all got offers from other universities, offers that we probably couldn’t have matched. I don’t think my department is unique in the least.

I don’t see how I can offer a cite for this (the administration never tells us to do anything illegal, like “Hire any jackass who claims to be Black whether qualified or not” and they certainly don’t write these things down). In the past, people have doubted that I’m a professor, or that I’m a published poet, or several other pieces of information that will reveal delicate information (like my name and address) if I were to divulge here, so I can’t think of a way to cite it.

But I’m willing to accept on faith that you’re a former administrator at the EOC, and that you’re telling me the truth. Should I doubt that because you can’t give me a cite?